Tuesday, May 08, 2007

My Newest Letter to George Bush

Dear George,

Several months ago I wrote to you with my suggestion to save your presidency and perhaps keep you from going down in history as the worst president ever. I realize now that you may not have read my letter. It was kind of long. And I used a few big words. So, in this letter I will use a lot of pictures to try to keep you interested.

I am writing you this time to point out something that I think you have overlooked.

I realize that I have criticized you often in the past – but this time I am going to try and stay positive - point out a strength.

George you are without a doubt the best President ever ........................................ at staging military photo ops.

Let’s sample your body of work shall we.

Who can forget this one?

Or this one? Nice Jacket! This one may not have been the best choice?But then you really out did yourself? Now to the main reason for this letter. George you have overlooked the best military photo op possible. And you are running out of time.

All the polls show that this country remains extremely divided (although you are doing your best to unite us in our dislike for you). The one thing that every American agrees on is our support for the Men and Women of the United States Military. Even while many disagree with the War in Iraq - we unanamously support the troops.

So I ask you – wouldn’t the best military photo op possible – be you leading the parade of soldiers returning to the hero’s welcome they would undoubtedly receive? Think of it George – millions of citizens lining the streets of every small town in America welcoming home the troops. And, you could travel the country and lead every parade.

Now that would be history George. Think about it - do you really want Hillary’s photos gracing those pages of the history books? No - that is your destiny - you have earned it.

5 comments:

You're right; no one ever says that they don't "support the troops". But let me just throw something out there for consideration...

Back in the late 60's and early 70's, when I was but a wee lad (O.K., I was never really "wee"), we were involved in another ill-advised war. Many Americans (maybe a majority, maybe not) wanted an end to the war, ASAP. In fact, many Americans were so adament in their desire to end the war in Viet Nam, they took to the streets in protest. Not smiling, civil little gatherings on the side of the road, trying to get passers-by to honk in support; big, loud, sometimes violent protests. College campuses became battlegrounds. There were riots. Rocks were thrown, billy clubs swung, tear gas lobbed, and a few "hippies" even got themselves shot (ironically, by National Guardsmen, who now make-up a large percentage of the "troops" we so unanimously support.

As I recall, there wasn't a lot of talk by the protesters about "supporting the troops". In fact, our soldiers in the Viet Nam war were referred to in somewhat less than revered terms. Instead of "our brave men and women in uniform", "heroes fighting for freedom", they were called "baby-killers". And these were not volunteers! Many of them were fighting against their will.

Now, the armed services are all volunteer. Many of the admittedly-brave folks fighting in Iraq signed-up with the full knowledge of where they would end-up. And most of those folks now fighting in Iraq signed-up long after it had been well established that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, and possessed no weapons of mass destruction.

It feels almost sacreligious to point this out, but it's just something that has been on my mind...

On the other hand, I tend to think that the vast majority of "volunteers" who choose to risk their lives for the paltry wages of the US Military are young people who see few other good career options for themselves.

I'm sure there are exceptions, but in general I'm willing to give them all the benefit of the doubt.

Of course, I won't be attending any parades for the mercenaries from Blackwater, etc.!

Yeah, the draftees in the Viet Nam war and the volunteers in the Iraq war have both tended to be from depressed socio-economic backgrounds. Still, I think that there's some responsibility there. And there's an element of hypocracy among those of us who claim to support the troops, but oppose the war.

I guess I'm just suffering from a little cognative dissonence (sorry; Psych Major). The protesters against the Viet Nam war had the courage of their convictions, and didn't really care about a political backlash. And there was a backlash; the anti-war Presidential candidate, McGovern, got routed, and to some extent, the relatively innocent veterans became pariahs. This time, perhaps having learned our political lessons, pretty much everyone is calling the soldiers heroes, whether they deserve it or not. I guess a little hypocracy is the price we have to pay for an anti-war President. At least, I hope that's what we end-up with...

Interestingly, there's a post of DailyKos today (Another Casualty of the Iraq War") that looks at this issue from a different angle. The article, and the comments on the article, explore the effects of the war on military recruitment, and the very negative effects on those among the disadvantaged who have made the moral decision not to consider military service because of the war. It all ties in together, and it's all bad. Hell of a job, Bushie.